US Housing Market
- Thread starter JamieDimonsBalls
- Start date
Got a former neighbor who lives along the river. Bought himself a big boat with social security money. (An argument for means testing.)
He just bought a new Corvette convertible to replace his Pontiac Solstice. Saw it last week. It's nice. But he's got bladder cancer, after having survived a prior episode of some form of cancer. His wife died of cancer about 12 years ago. I guess if you're gonna live out your dreams . . . .
And with interest rates high, businesses aren't going to rush to meet the demand.
Ha. I love North Carolina. It has everything from mountains to beaches to great schools.
Charlotte was our home opener tonight for mls
Soccer has gotten huge overnight in Charlotte. Huge Hispanic population here and they flock to it.
North Carolina does have everything, but it's all a long way from Charlotte. Mountains are 2 hours away and the beaches are 4 hours and the Outer Banks is 6 hours.
all major universities are great.
some just have more corporate backing, a better "brand", (which is corporate controlled), and better PR.
Our daughter moved to TN (south of Nashville) about a year ago and had a house built They've gotten to know quite a few people in their neighborhood and she was telling me that they had only met one person that is native to TN. She said a lot of them are from CA.
the whole interest rate thing breaks down not to the end cost of the home, but rather the split of the proceeds between the seller and the banks.
that said, high interest rates greatly favor the cash buyer or self financing, thus the institutional buyers who are now buying up a lot of the former "starter homes" for rental income.
that starter homes are more valuable as rental property than owner occupied, perverts the dynamic and kills the first time buyer.
and the starter homes' values being driven up by the investors, for rentals or flips, drives up the other home values as well.
the otherwise supply vs demand cost thing is being pushed up from the bottom as a whole by investors and institutional buyers.
as is the cost of the dirt by the same dynamics, and the geography of most of today's available dirt is farther and farther from the jobs and city hubs..
that said, high interest rates greatly favor the cash buyer or self financing, thus the institutional buyers who are now buying up a lot of the former "starter homes" for rental income.
that starter homes are more valuable as rental property than owner occupied, perverts the dynamic and kills the first time buyer.
and the starter homes' values being driven up by the investors, for rentals or flips, drives up the other home values as well.
the otherwise supply vs demand cost thing is being pushed up from the bottom as a whole by investors and institutional buyers.
as is the cost of the dirt by the same dynamics, and the geography of most of today's available dirt is farther and farther from the jobs and city hubs..
I built a house in '88 when interest rates were somewhere around 8%. Building had slowed to a crawl and builders were desperate to find work.
I decided the actual price of the house was more important than the interest rates, because interest rates would eventually go down and I could always refinance - which is what I did.
I built on Morse Reservoir and prices skyrocketed in the 90s. I think I made a pretty good decision.
I need to visit the coast more, but it's a long drive. I'll try to check that out.
@JamieDimonsBalls This is so confusing for someone as amateur as I. Are you saying the value of homes is going down while the cost of getting a mortgage is going up?
Housing market financial markets im always hearing myself say “Wait. What?”
The cost of a mortgage has nothing to do with the value of homes. 2 separate issues, except where mortgage interest rates tamp down demand enough to affect the price.
And value and prices are 2 separate things for tax purposes.
The cost of a mortgage is getting high enough that it’s eliminated demand (mortgage app lows means there are not going to be many buyers, particularly for low and mid-range homes) and the monthly payment is significantly reducing buying power.
Therefore, values are going to start falling hard.
Should have kept it considering waterfront property in central Indiana is pretty limited. Prices are nuts now for waterfront within an hour or so of Indy.
Yeah, I know - the value of that house is through the roof.
I hated living on the lake. Because guess who had to maintain the dock, maintain the boat, entertain everyone on the boat, drive the boat while everyone else was skiing and drinking, cleaning up the boat afterwards while everyone else was back in the house partying it up?
Besides, as I told my wife, the value of your house means nothing unless you sell it.
If you look at what I paid in '88 and sold it for in '98, I think, in today's dollars, it appreciated more in those 10 years than since then. I've never second-guessed my decision, which was also based on commuting and time spent with my newborn daughter.
A solid, affordable option. Great golf as well.
www.explorethevillage.com
Hot Springs Village, Arkansas | Active Lifestyle Community
Hot Springs Village is home to 12 lakes, 9 golf courses, 15 tennis courts, over 30 miles of trails, and offers numerous additional activities for all ages.
A solid, affordable option. Great golf as well.
Hot Springs Village, Arkansas | Active Lifestyle Community
Hot Springs Village is home to 12 lakes, 9 golf courses, 15 tennis courts, over 30 miles of trails, and offers numerous additional activities for all ages.
Is this the new Villages?
I don't know much about the housing market. I do own a home back in Northern Indiana. That's about it. But if the problem is not enough homes for people to live in then wouldn't President Trump's idea about building new cities by selling off federal land be a good idea? What do you and others think about that?
Land isn’t the issue. The issue is willing labor and capital to support new home construction.
Even I have to admit that's a pretty bizarre idea. It kind of reminds me of the cities that China has built that no one lives in.
One issue I have heard talked about is that in our cities housing has become dilapidated and with the influx of (illegals) new residents there will be a need for housing. So the idea of building new instead of fixing old might work. I am not saying I am in favor of it but it is an interesting discussion.
Dude, I was in Shanghai about 7-8 yrs ago. 40-50 story high rises everywhere. Between foot and car traffic, you might see A (as in ONE) person every 1.5 - 2 minutes, ish. It was like lights in high rises were on timers. Really had a strange vibe to it.
It's a bizarre notion. Where would people work? You don't just pick up companies and move them somewhere willy nilly.
Old buildings are being torn down or remodeled every day in American cities. To just think you can duplicate that somewhere and have everyone move there is just fanciful thinking.
I’m curious in regards to which cities you are referring to when stating “our cities housing has become dilapidated”. A number of cities I’ve been too have numerous neighborhoods that have regentrified and the issue/challenge for some residents is affordability rather than dilapidation.
There's a shortage of affordable housing stock generally. City housing is very neighborhood dependent and frequently turns over. Good ones become shitty and shitty become good.
Similar threads
